AMD A8-3850 Review: Llano Rocks Entry-Level Desktops

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]ChiefTexas_82[/nom]Since when does a 100W CPU and a 6530 need a 850W power supply???Anyway, The real show should be bulldozer-based APU's. If they could just get the graphics up to a 5750 level...[/citation]

They don't--I used a 500 W PSU :)
Chris
 
[citation][nom]flong[/nom]I don't want to be rude, but can somebody explain to me why anyone would spend $135 on this CPU when for $70 more you can get the 2500K - it just doesn't make sense to me.[/citation]

Because you'd also need a discrete graphics card for any sort of reasonable 3D performance. So, it's much more than $70.
 
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]Because you'd also need a discrete graphics card for any sort of reasonable 3D performance. So, it's much more than $70.[/citation]

Agreed, but still this CPU's performance is anemic. Couple the 2500K and a $75 - $100 discrete graphics card and you will be in a world of performance that this CPU could never even dream of.

So for an extra $150 - $200 you can actually play every game at very high settings (not the highest with a cheaper GPU). Nowadays, $150 - $200 is nothing when a GTX 580 is going for $530.

I understand that an uninformed person might choose this, but still it makes no sense to me. I can't imagine settling for this CPU/graphics card setup when for $150 more you actually have a real gaming computer that gives the $1000 I-7 990 a run for its money.
 
Ahh, an interesting quality review. I was looking forward to how Llano would perform on the desktop. It's very pertinent information if I or my budget-constrained friends need a new PC.

One thing that caused major confusion for me was that in the Test Setup page it's written that AMD 890FX/SB850 is used on the Asus M4A89GTD Pro/USB3. It should be 890GX. I know the 890FX doesn't have integrated graphics so it took me awhile to realize what you were talking about when you were referring to the Radeon HD 4290.
 
Much better performance vs price and power consumption!
I find the A8-3800 to be the most interesting CPU in the entire A-line.

It's still 30% ($15) more than CAS9 equivalents.

I think the entire idea of using anything but "value" RAM (typically with CAS9) for this CPU seems futile, since it will eat up most of the price advantage.

 
[citation][nom]nevertell[/nom]Do they have a proper set of SSE4 instructions now ?[/citation]
Not on Llano, as it's still using the Stars architecture. As such, they employ SSE4a but not .1 or .2. Bulldozer will support these plus AVX and XOP, CVT16 and FMA4, the three of which used to be part of the SSE5 spec.
 
[citation][nom]flong[/nom]Agreed, but still this CPU's performance is anemic. Couple the 2500K and a $75 - $100 discrete graphics card and you will be in a world of performance that this CPU could never even dream of. So for an extra $150 - $200 you can actually play every game at very high settings (not the highest with a cheaper GPU). Nowadays, $150 - $200 is nothing when a GTX 580 is going for $530. I understand that an uninformed person might choose this, but still it makes no sense to me. I can't imagine settling for this CPU/graphics card setup when for $150 more you actually have a real gaming computer that gives the $1000 I-7 990 a run for its money.[/citation]

Oh no doubt. The CPU is far weaker than a Core i5. That's why I am saying that if you only have $135 to spend on a processor and graphics, Llano can't be beat. At any price point higher, you can easily do better with a better CPU and discrete graphics.
 
[citation][nom]weatherdude[/nom]Ahh, an interesting quality review. I was looking forward to how Llano would perform on the desktop. It's very pertinent information if I or my budget-constrained friends need a new PC.One thing that caused major confusion for me was that in the Test Setup page it's written that AMD 890FX/SB850 is used on the Asus M4A89GTD Pro/USB3. It should be 890GX. I know the 890FX doesn't have integrated graphics so it took me awhile to realize what you were talking about when you were referring to the Radeon HD 4290.[/citation]

Thanks Weather, you're right--fixed the typo!
 
What does one need to know about maximum addressable memory with these APUs? Could I install, say, 6GB, and use a 32-bit OS, and expect both halves of the APU to be happy?
 
[citation][nom]flong[/nom]I don't want to be rude, but can somebody explain to me why anyone would spend $135 on this CPU when for $70 more you can get the 2500K - it just doesn't make sense to me.[/citation]

When you don't have $200+ to spend on your CPU (AKA a budget build)...
 
I'd probably stick with the usual AM3+/Bulldozer - these don't add a *ton* of fuctionality for the same price as some of the Phenom II quad cores. I'd absolutely love to see the laptop APUs in netbooks and midsized laptops (11-13") though - graphics performance is the biggest hangup on those.
 
Why is everyone constantly complaining about not seeing the point as a more powerful chip is only a bit more??

I work in a computer shop, and I can imagine these things selling like hotcakes, there are soooo many more people building a budget desktop system than you might think!
 
I personally think the power draw figures are a huge win for AMD.

It has suffered for a long time as the hotter, more power-hungry processor of the two - and to a degree, it is still true in the Phenom II generation. But I was seriously impressed at the power consumption figures for both variants of Llano.

Of course it doesn't pull too many decisive victories, but for an APU full of tough compromises and a rather old architecture, it's brilliant.
 
[citation][nom]SteelCity1981[/nom]So then what's the point of getting the Turbo Core versions when they are going to be Turbo Clocked slower then the none Turbo Clocked versions...[/citation]

Price and the TDP

 
A few thoughts:

I think the reason that memory makes such a big difference in a Llano build is because the integrated graphics steal from the RAM. Common integrated graphics behavior, but at least it's doing something meaningful with the theft.

Looks like AMD has been trying to capitalize on their acquisition of ATI with these new chips. A bit of a gamble, and I don't think it paid off. I'm much more impressed by the innovations they made - like the native usb3, support for six sataIII's, and software RAID - rather than the radical graphics architecture.

I really don't understand the theory here. Computers have been utilizing separate CPU and GPU chips for a decade now and it is obviously the most powerful way to go. This integrated graphics improvement is nice, but I don't think it was worth years of investment and loss of market share. Maybe they are going for the console market. I could see the appeal of using something like this in a new Xbox.
 
great article but why would i spend money into those computer ? Cpu power is bad graphic is not powerfull enough to play for good experience gaming. may want to continue play xbox or playstation... for 80$ more you have a 2400 cpu for cpu application wich beat down the 3850. only the mobile version is worth a buy for his many feature benefit against competition.
 
Good lord reading the comments some of you people are really dense. Do you not understand the target market for these and can take the review in context????? Not everything should be looked at as though you are a custom power cpu/game builder.

Great review Chris. For the target market AMD is doing a pretty good job here with an old CPU architecture and once they pair this with Bulldozer they should have a killer product.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom